No-one likes general adverts, and ours hadn't been updated for ages, so we're having a clear-out and a change round to make the new ones useful to you. These new adverts bring in a small amount to help pay for the board and keep it free for you to use, so please do use them whenever you can, Let our links help you find great books on glass or a new piece for your collection. Thank you for supporting the Board.

Author
Topic: another one I don't know. (Read 3406 times)

Allan - what is really interesting is that Jerry Gard (I have no idea who in the paperweight community knows whom, so I don't know if you're familiar with him) sent me a note about the Whital-Tatum umbrella design weights, and commented that he has 2 with similar cracks.

How likely would it be that a series of similar weights would, with time, develop similar cracks. I had thought that it would probably have occurred in the annealing process more frequently, but then I'm just an accountant - you're the expert in the field.

Hi Don, No I am afraid to say that I don't know Jerry.You are correct in assuming that most compatibility problems show up during the annealing process.However it is possible that the style of weight we are talking about could have been produced and sold before the problem came to light and therefore a batch of similar cracked weights would come to light at around the same time.We most notably had a small glitch of this kind at the start of making our "triple magnum " sized weights many years ago;these monsters weighed in at about 9-10 kgs each and we misjudged the annealing time,which we did not realise untill a while after the first ones sold.They seemed perfect when they were sent out, but after a couple of collectors got in touch to say theirs had split,we changed the annealing time to 48hrs and the problem was solved.The collectors were obviously given replacements with much apologies. I would like to think the makers of the umbrella weights were ignorant of the problem; as the alternative theory, that they sold them knowing there was a fault,is a really awful thing to do to your collectors. Allan

Logged

Support the Glass Message Board by finding glass through glass-seek.com

I certainly did not intend to imply that Whital Tatum would have sold the weights thinking that they could crack. If nothing else, an artist would not lower himself like that.

I was speculating that perhaps the fractures occurred at the plant, and the decision was made to release them with the fractures. I for one think that the fractures actually make for an interesting feature! They also clearly make each piece unique!

Hi Don, Your post certainly didn't imply anything bad of the makers,I was just making a general observation on the subject.I wonder if they sold seconds from their glassworks, maybe it would be an explanation for their existence.I also agree that the stress fractures can be fascinating for people;I keep a pre-production sample of a weight called "African adventure" in my workshop to show collectors.The base colour we tried first did not match the clear glass so it has a very smooth mirror crack which covers half of the area where the two meet.Any visitors we get are always intriqued by it and the reasons for it.Unfortunately it is slowly spreading,( I think because of the heat in the workshop),so probably it will eventually fall apart.Nevermind, I am sure another example will appear when we least want it to :lol: Allan

Logged

Support the Glass Message Board by finding glass through glass-seek.com

Re. Those who made paperweights & related objects circa the turn of the 20th century at Whital Tatum in Millville, NJ:

These makers include Ralph Barber, John Rhulander, Michael Kane, Marcus Kuntz, Emil Stanger to name the most famous.

These makers made weights on their own time. Whital Tatum was a glass factory that made bottles, glasses, mugs, pitchers, etc...Not paperweights.

As such, those who chose to make weights made them on their own time during lunch or before or after hours.

Back then, little was known about co efficients of expansion and glass color compatibility and the like. So there was a bit of the luck of the draw there.Also, their annealing ovens were used by many and for Factory work, not simply for paperweights.As such, the doors to the ovens were opened for factory product to be placed inside, this often causing undo rapid cooling & stressto the demonstrably thicker, solid cased paperweights.

So then, why did weights that came out of the oven cracked make their way out of the factory?Probably because the makers were still proud of them, treasured their work, and did not want to destroy their labour.

Furthermore, back in those days, most of what they made were given as gifts or traded for other goods. They were Not sold for cash.

Finally, Allan is correct in that many weights with internal stressors do Not show their cracks until long after they were made.So if many of those made at Millville back in the day often had color compatibility issues or were poorly annealed, then some would show a crack(s) immediately while others might go a long time before the stressor commenced to cracking.

Here is a nice view of a footed Millville Lily that I own that isn't cracked: